NOTE: except for Quick Pick Treasures I no longer rate films because it's simply more than I can do while keeping up this listing. I encourage you to write a review of any fan film you watch, and tell me. Put it in a blog or elsewhere on the web and I will link to it as long as it is about the film, not the actors or people you are angry at, it is suitable for reading by children (unless the film is in Star Trek Restricted), and is in reasonably readable language.
I use a 6 point rating system. From best to worse, the rating system is:
5 - Excellent, wonderful -- as good as the best Star Trek made by anyone. It does well on all these: 1) Well written, 2) well acted, 3) enjoyable use of sets, background, CGI or other special effects, 4) entertaining, 5) well directed, 6) well edited, 7) it makes a point of some kind or explores an idea of political, scientific or social scientific interest... whether I agree or not, and 8) it provides a low level of suspension of disbelief beyond that required to watch and enjoy TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY. A 5 has all of these traits.
4 - Very Good, Entertaining, has 6 or 7 of the 8 points.
3 - Good to OK. It is a matter of taste. It has 4 or 5 points of 8. If you like Star Trek, it's probably worth a try.
2 - Not so good to watch. It has something going for it, but it only hits on 2 or 3 of the points, or is weak technically (see below). I recommend watching NovaScienceNow on PBS instead. Neil DeGrasse Tyson will give you The Cosmic Perspective. If it makes you feel better, he opened the show on August 18, 2009 wearing an TOS Starfleet captain's uniform...
1 - Hard to watch. It may have something good about it. Either it has just one or zero of the eight points, or it may just be technically so weak that it's hard to follow. but you'd be much better entertained by reruns of most made for television classroom lecture shows. Can I recommend "The Western Tradition," introduction to physics or a nice course in Algebra or Statistics?
Really, Really Bad Stuff" or 0 - ... this stuff is worse than hard to watch. It's aggressively bad, and it has no redeeming qualities. These films are not given their own webpages, but are listed here: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/209.html . They do offer us one redeeming quality... they make us appreciate the serious but failed efforts that may be rated a 1 or a 2.
EXTRA CREDIT for just plain fun!
LOSE ONE POINT if the quality of the sound and video make watching it difficult, TWO POINTS if it's so bad it makes it hard to follow.
LOSE ONE POINT for including non-Star Trek science fiction or serious literary sources (e.g., it treats Hamlet as history, not a play) in the stories, TWO POINTS if the non-Star Trek materials are from fantasy or other non-reality based and non-Science Fiction sources (it includes magic, vampires, aliens who defy the laws of physics like Superman or Star Wars).
For a better understanding of the thinking behind this rating system, read these Blogs:
Or read my review of the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie, http://startrekreviewed-tvandmovies.blogspot.com/2012/01/movie-11.html
All rated fan films represent significant work. All rated fan films beat out watching meaningless trailers, teasers, credits for films that don't exist. Fan films websites listed under Blog 210 have no product. But these websites can issue a single full episode and can get any rating. This website is for viewers who want to watch fan films, not people who want to create them. Videos listed in Blog 209 are bad enough that my assertion that anything rated is better than just watching trailers and looking at banners is violated. The purpose of the ratings are to help the viewer not to degrade the creators, all of whom have clearly worked hard and lovingly.
FOR CREATORS OF FAN FILMS: I am trying to include the physical location of all fan film productions so that people who would like to be involved can contact a fan film in their own part of the world. That is also why I am including fan film websites with no product.